Why Tim Cook is NOT Steve Ballmer

Steve Blank’s almost “academic” essay on why Apple is (pretty much) doomed has generated a lot of interest on the web. It is very interesting indeed. Does it depict the reality accurately? I am not sure.

NB: I spent a decade at Apple in product marketing so yes, I am biased, You could also argue I have “some” insights.

Here is Steve’s thesis:

“What happens to a company when a visionary CEO is gone? Most often innovation dies and the company coasts for years on momentum and its brand. Rarely does it regain its former glory.” [and that’s Apple’s fate].

And the whole thesis is derived from comparing Microsoft’s and Apple’s trajectories and concluding that they are the same:

From Steve’s article… and called “apple-equals-microsoft.png”

So let’s look into this a bit more.

1- How innovative has Microsoft been during Bill Gates’s tenure?

“Microsoft entered the 21st century as the dominant software provider for anyone who interacted with a computing device”.

Absolutely. That was Windows (desktop operating system), Office and Internet Explorer (I’ll argue the latter two are by-products of the first one, the desktop operating system).

The “genesis” of the Windows’s OS dates from the early days of Microsoft. Which other “fundamental” invention did they market before the 21st century?

Now let’s contrast it with Apple’s history:

• the GUI/Mouse based personal computer (Mac)*
• first mainstream portable music player (iPod)*
• first mainstream, legal online content distribution platform (iTunes Store)
• Apple Retail
• iPhone
• App Store
• iPad*

* The pundits will argue that Apple did not invent these categories. Maybe. I’ll argue that Microsoft certainly did not invent the operating system either. This is a different topic all together and outside of the discussion here.

Here is a first counter argument to Steve’s:

Deep in its veins, Apple has product innovation at its core. It’s less clear when it comes to Microsoft.

And the follow-up question: can a company develop a “culture” of product innovation that can survive its founder? Time will tell, but we simply don’t know yet.

2- Steve’s 2nd point: “Microsoft missed the boat 5 times”. Has Apple missed the boat since Steve left?

It’s a genuine question. What new fundamental technology shifts happened recently that Apple missed?

• internet services: some people say Apple is not very good at these. Maybe. But in all the cases: they pre-date Steve’s passing. Mind you, he himself put a strong emphasise internally on iCloud services during his tenure. Anyway, all that to say: I don’t think it’s Tim’s new org that missed something here.
• VR/AR: well, I don’t think we can draw any conclusion on this just yet, can we? There’s no mainstream product yet, and — who knows — maybe Apple have stuff in the work.
• AI: that’s an interesting one. Apple was one of the first to market (during Steve’s tenure) with an intelligent assistant (Siri — a tech they purchased). And yet somehow they did not seem to be “all in”. Well I’d argue that: a- they certainly have people working on this, but — in typical Apple fashion — a “tech” is developed to be used in actual products. It’s not featured in and of itself. So no, Apple will not show off a new deep learning implementation that beats a Go player for the sake of it. Does it mean they missed this shift? Maybe, maybe not. b- maybe they did feel a boat was starting to sail. But if they did, they quickly acted:

And lastly: can we really say that anyone won this game and Apple missed it just yet? It’s too early.

• social networks? Well Steve himself had a go at it with Ping. No comments, but again: not something you can impute to Tim’s org.

There are more examples: on-demand economy, electric cars, what have you. But these are a bit more remote from Apple’s typical remit and arguing that “Apple should not have missed them” is a stretch.

So: I don’t think we can conclude that Apple has missed any boat at this stage. I think there has not been YET another boat. So to people who say “Apple has not innovated since Steve’s passing” (implying that others did) I reply: who did in this space? Could we argue that this cycle is taking a bit longer?

3- There’s a KEY missing character in the whole story. And that’s Jony Ive.

• Anyone who has been at Apple or studied Apple will tell you that Jony has a tremendous influence within the organisation.
• it’s not an “execution” kind of influence. It is very much a product and vision influence.

Does Steve Blank’s org model apply to Apple?

Can you name a single other employee at Microsoft with the same level of internal AND external visibility and product charisma?

And there’s a corollary: yes, Tim is the only CEO of Apple. But assuming it means he will just treat Jony — and, frankly, the other product lieutenants — as mere reports in the organisation, is —I think — a simplistic conclusion.

This sums up why I believe Steve’s conclusion, derived from comparing Apple to Microsoft, is premature:

1- it’s not clear whether Microsoft ever had a culture of product innovation. Apple certainly does.

2- it’s clear that Microsoft missed several boats. It simply does not hold true for Apple at this stage.

3- Microsoft had Bill Gates, and then Steve Ballmer. Apple’s Steve worked hand in hand with Jony Ive who is a fascinating product visionary, extremely influential within the organisation, and still very present to this day.

If you think this article is interesting, please don’t hesitate to “Recommend” it with the little green heart button below. It really helps and more people will see it. Thanks!